• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

“We need to kill gameplay” says Ex-People Can Fly dev

RyL

Banned
Grim Fandango or any Tim Schafer Adventure game is proof enough that gameplay + story can work perfectly together if it's well balanced.
 
I guess that if you are not able to make great gameplay then you look smarter when making games with bad gameplay if you make pseudy comments about how gameplay is holding us back and games are better without. (see also 30fps defence)
 
Grim Fandango or any Tim Schafer Adventure game is proof enough that gameplay + story can work perfectly together if it's well balanced.

I think those classic LucasArts games are just the kind of games that work great without basic gameplay mechanic of death. You don't have to be afraid of dying if you click the wrong item, or wander to a new area. That's more relaxing and interesting to me than Sierra way of doing things. Compare that to Space Quest, where you die all the time, and became practically paranoid, saving after every step.
 
"I don't know how to get these things to make sense together, work with eachother in an interactive and fun/deep/meaningful way, thus one of them has to die" "Game" Developer.

Figure out the problem, make them work together, that's what a game designer it's supposed to do. Gameplay can greatly enhance the story and the game, putting more meaning behind the actions of the player, besides games should never compromise on the gameplay part, cause they're games first and foremost, interactivity and gameplay are paramount to the medium.
 

Wiktor

Member
I think those classic LucasArts games are just the kind of games that work great without basic gameplay mechanic of death. You don't have to be afraid of dying if you click the wrong item, or wander to a new area. That's more relaxing and interesting to me than Sierra way of doing things. Compare that to Space Quest, where you die all the time, and became practically paranoid, saving after every step.

One of the reasons why Sierra > LucasArts
 

taoofjord

Member
The quote in this thread's title is taken out of context and presented in such a way as to manipulate the reader. Not to mention that he never actually said "kill gameplay" (as far as I can tell). I wish this sort of thing was frowned upon as I see this happening more often than it should.
 

Perkel

Banned
The quote in this thread's title is taken out of context and presented in such a way as to manipulate the reader. I wish this sort of thing was frowned upon as I see this happening more often than it should.

this. And thread still goes pages. Also this comes from ex-PCF dev which gave us Painkiller (original) and Bulletstorm two very good games all about gameplay.
 

sonicmj1

Member
The quote in this thread's title is taken out of context and presented in such a way as to manipulate the reader. Not to mention that he never actually said "kill gameplay" (as far as I can tell). I wish this sort of thing was frowned upon as I see this happening more often than it should.

I don't know why they needed to do that, considering the post's title "Why we need to kill gameplay to make better games" is already plenty provocative and misleading.
 
Grim Fandango or any Tim Schafer Adventure game is proof enough that gameplay + story can work perfectly together if it's well balanced.

While Tim Schaffer is probably my favorite western developer of all time, and his adventure games rock, that is one of the very few genres that can marry story and gameplay so conveniently. The thing is that I don't want to exclusively play adventure games for the rest of my life, so to enjoy other genres (or rather, to enjoy some of the other genres), either story or gameplay has to be sacrificed to an extent. And I'm perfectly fine with that!

The one thing that worries me about this discussion is that it's not "I prefer so an so", which is perfectly fine, but "so and so is the only thing that should exist, the other isn't even a game". That's dangerously close to censorship. Let's just live and let live, okay?
 
One of the reasons why Sierra > LucasArts

I really couldn't disagree more, Monkey Islands 1 and 2, Loom and Indy Atlantis are so much better than King, Space and Police Quest games :) (Altough the first Gabriel Knight is one of my all time favourites). And even later Sierra games at least made dying a lot more difficult, if not impossible... But yeah, it's good that we have both kind of games.
 

Dr.Hadji

Member
i'm sorry but playing something when it has a ruleset (and cops and robbers does, even if they are often invented on the spot) is most definetly a game.

If it has rules, a challenge and some quantifiable outcomes then sure. Its uses the rules of tag, modified for teams and jail breaking. Challenge stems from moving, dodging, running, ect. Quantifiable outcomes, you get tagged you're in jail, robber's numbers decrease. When robbers numbers = 0 game over, cops win. It is most certainly a game.

He is right though. All play doesn't have to be done through games. For example, playing house isn't a game (in all the variant I know anyway).
 
cops and robbers was an awesome game. maybe he's getting mixed up with cowboys and indians, which afaik doesn't have a dedicated ruleset or objective.

The quote in this thread's title is taken out of context and presented in such a way as to manipulate the reader. Not to mention that he never actually said "kill gameplay" (as far as I can tell). I wish this sort of thing was frowned upon as I see this happening more often than it should.
so what would you suggest be a better thread title for an article named by the author, "why we need to kill gameplay to make better games?" the content of the article isn't any better than its sensationalist title. i really don't think this is one of these times. he ends off his article by asking, "Do you play games to pass the time or to create memories?" he's clearly pandering to the audience that would choose the latter, and consequently somewhat belittling the audience that would choose the former.
 

taoofjord

Member
cops and robbers was an awesome game. maybe he's getting mixed up with cowboys and indians, which afaik doesn't have a dedicated ruleset or objective.


so what would you suggest be a better thread title for an article named by the author, "why we need to kill gameplay to make better games?" the content of the article isn't any better than its sensationalist title. i really don't think this is one of these times. he ends off his article by asking, "Do you play games to pass the time or to create memories?" he's clearly pandering to the audience that would choose the latter, and consequently somewhat belittling the audience that would choose the former.

I'd suggest that the OP not post an article that is sensationalist to begin with.

Or, do a little digging, check the facts, find the real story, and put that up for discussion. Otherwise we're wasting time and energy.
 

Xenon

Member
We love desserts for being sweet, right? At least that’s what I thought all my life. But after a reboot of my brain happened, I was stunned with the discovery that it might not necessarily be true.

I mean, I still like desserts when they are sweet. It’s just that I love them when they are not.

Recently I made a very delicious savory dessert. I discovered that it was so much easier to discern the different flavors when they were not drowned out by sugar or sweeteners. This will allow desserts to be more complex and intricate thus creating a much richer, dare I say more memorable, experience for one's pallet. When you eat a great apple pie do you recall it's sweetness. NO, you think about the touch of cinnamon and the hint of nutmeg. These are the things we need to focus on. The sugar just gets in the way.


=P

It's funny this guy brought up the radio in GTAIII. Because, it was an important part of my most fond memory from the game. I had just started playing it and was running away from cops after doing some mission. My car ended up totaled. I ended up borrowing a car from a fellow citizen which happened to be set to the classical music station. By now the police were swarming around me and I ended up on the road right in front of the first hideout. The one with the long stretch of park between it and the river. So I found myself on the walkway of the park quoting lines from Highlander as I avoided cops and hit pedestrians. Finally I ended up launching off some concrete fixture into the air. It was at that moment I noticed the music playing. I can't remember what classical song was playing. But it was one of those moments where everything goes in slow motion. It was beautiful. I sailed over the cops, a bridge filled with more cops(not sure about this one), and landed perfectly to make my escape.

I will admit that the music played a big part in creating that memory. Still there were so many other parts that involved actually playing the game as well. The point I'm trying to make is don't confuse component or ingredient of what can make a good game with the fucking game itself.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
@davepoobond: "Lessons" lol. "Change outlook for life" lol. Just tell me again, why wouldn't you want your information presented with as much clarity as possible?

because half of the enjoyment for me is to figure out what they're trying to tell me. and where all of the hours i'm putting into is heading towards. if i wanted the information clearly i would just read spoilers for every game i was playing and not bother.

you might laugh at this sort of stuff, but i'm sorry that you can't take games as seriously as i do. video games are just as meaningful to me as movies are. there is a purpose ingrained in any worthwhile game even if it is subtle and people like you laugh at the prospect of being able to take something away from a video game.
 

Riposte

Member
because half of the enjoyment for me is to figure out what they're trying to tell me. and where all of the hours i'm putting into is heading towards. if i wanted the information clearly i would just read spoilers for every game i was playing and not bother.

you might laugh at this sort of stuff, but i'm sorry that you can't take games as seriously as i do. video games are just as meaningful to me as movies are. there is a purpose ingrained in any worthwhile game even if it is subtle and people like you laugh at the prospect of being able to take something away from a video game.

Trust me, I take games very seriously. Here you struggle to "find meaning" in dreams and puzzles meant to take you AWAY from reality, when you should instead be working with clear, precise thoughts (which in turn will likely allow you to enjoy games, among other things, even more). You failed to see what I was saying though. Reading spoilers for a game's story doesn't help you, reading a philosopher's or scientist's work might though. What games are "trying to tell you" is usually very obvious (and if not, it is probably obfuscated in an attempt of pseudo-intellectualism) and most of the time has already been explained properly (meaning if a game moves you, then you should be inspired to solve your lack of education through the correct channels). This isn't a problem for the game though. "Good messages", no matter how simple and instinctual, are endlessly pleasing.

Btw, everything I'm saying applies to movies as well, just to a lesser extent. Maybe we can think of it like a spectrum: On one end you have the succinctly expressed message in either spoken or written form and the other you have a method which involves the "messenger" actively trying to stop you from seeing the big picture.
 

Saphathorael

Neo Member
Hey, it's Adrian Chmielarz again, this time from my own account finally. (Saphathorael is one of the bosses in Painkiller :).

It was great to read all the comments. Yeah, a lot of people just read the OP then jumped right to the end to elaborate on the blasphemous physical activities concerning my rectum, but even that teaches one to write better. And the comments where people actually had something substantial to say (doesn't matter whether they agreed with me or not)? Pure gold.

Anyway, here's the post mortem, where I quote and have fun with some of you:

http://www.theastronauts.com/2012/11/killing-the-gameplay-postmortem/
 

Durante

Member
There's plenty of room for both kind of games. Can't we just get along?
Put simply, I agree.

I just don't understand why there's this impression that we can have only one type of game (or "interactive experience" to put it more broadly). Games focused 100% on mechanics and games that do away with them entirely can happily coexist.
 

Ciastek3214

Junior Member
Hey, it's Adrian Chmielarz again, this time from my own account finally. (Saphathorael is one of the bosses in Painkiller :).

It was great to read all the comments. Yeah, a lot of people just read the OP then jumped right to the end to elaborate on the blasphemous physical activities concerning my rectum, but even that teaches one to write better. And the comments where people actually had something substantial to say (doesn't matter whether they agreed with me or not)? Pure gold.

Anyway, here's the post mortem, where I quote and have fun with some of you:

http://www.theastronauts.com/2012/11/killing-the-gameplay-postmortem/

Hello there, I hope you enjoy your stay. Thanks for Gorky 17, Painkiller, and Bulletsorm.
 
I was with him until he said remove the gameplay from the Walking Dead. I thought he meant wasteful mechanics like - press A to mount this horse, press B to wave to your friend, push this stick up to look down, swipe the screen to clean this sword. Totally for killing that nonsense...
 

Perkel

Banned
Saphathorael
Junior Member -->>> Dyack opposite.


I don't agree about all things like gameplay-less areas but your point is valid. Also gameplay should also be considerated as "journey" in some cases. As mentioned everest. No one would want to climb it if it would be so easy. That's what DS is in nutshell connected with great gamplay-less moments.
 

sonicmj1

Member
Thanks for the post-mortem post. It highlights a lot of the interesting points people made, including some that point out the weaknesses in your argument. That Everest point is a really good one.

I'm looking forward to seeing the followup blog posts.
 

Saphathorael

Neo Member
Thank you. Here we go then:

http://www.theastronauts.com/2012/11/why-we-cant-feel-and-play-at-the-same-time/

Involving SCIENCE now! :)

I have tried to be clear that I never meant *all* games. I also don't refuse the right for the games to be gamey. Also, my research (including comments from this thread) made me slightly modify my position: maybe it's not about removing gameplay. Maybe it's about limiting it or assuring proper inputs. But again, not in all cases.

Aw hell, just read the post in the link :) Thanks!
 

Orayn

Member
Thank you. Here we go then:

http://www.theastronauts.com/2012/11/why-we-cant-feel-and-play-at-the-same-time/

Involving SCIENCE now! :)

I have tried to be clear that I never meant *all* games. I also don't refuse the right for the games to be gamey. Also, my research (including comments from this thread) made me slightly modify my position: maybe it's not about removing gameplay. Maybe it's about limiting it or assuring proper inputs. But again, not in all cases.

Aw hell, just read the post in the link :) Thanks!

Interesting. Have you considered that it's not necessarily messy or half-hearted design to embed low-input, high-emotion moments in a game that's normally demanding and mechanically intensive? I say this because your post reminded me of how reviews of Demon's Souls and Dark Souls talk about how the lull in the action that happens after you beat a boss is often one of the most memorable parts of the game because it gives you time to digest all the action and danger that you just went through.

I can understand limiting or removing core gameplay loops if you want to go in more the direction of interactive fiction and put the player's emotional experiences above all else, but in other cases I think it's possible to have the best of both worlds through good pacing and level design.
 

brumx

Member
we need more gameplay the only games that can do cut scenes well are GTA and MGS otherwise I want skip them.
 

FoxSpirit

Junior Member
Why do I mostly remember gameplay? Is it because I play multiplayer stuff?
Random TF2 thoughts: owning with Heavy, building a solid defense, silly instant respawn servers, long wait for medic über
I don't remember the "Meet the..." movies first.

I think it heavily depends on the individual. Some people seek more of an "experience" game, maybe because they remember that better. While I seek "gamey" games with simplistic but "epic" story and fantastic gameplay, as I tend to remember that better.
 

Saphathorael

Neo Member
I never touch multiplayer games in these game design musings. When you interact with another human being, even if the interface is clunky and the game is shit, you can have a wide range of emotions.

That is also why, for example, I always hesitate to use Journey as an example whenever I talk about "challenge-less games". You interact with another human being there. Yes, in a different way to, say, QuakeWorld ;) - but still.
 

MrMephistoX

Member
Yet another dev that wants games to be movies and works of art, eliminating fun because it's not an intelligent emotion. Sony would love this guy.

I'm half convinced that devs who want this are little more than USC film school rejects who saw games as an alternate path to reach their dream of directing feature films.
 
Top Bottom